SOME ISSUES OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPER GOVERNMENT IN THE RESOLUTION OF TAX DISPUTES

Author
, lawyer, certified auditor, graduate student of the Department of Financial Law, Ukraine, Kharkiv

In heading

 Law;

Signed print

 05.09.2024

Issues number

 2024 - №3 (58)

Page

 87-103

Type of articles

 Scientific article

Code UDK

 342.951:336.225

ISSN print

 2411-5584

Abstract

 Problem setting. Modern conditions demonstrate the ineffectiveness of old management methods, which necessitates administrative reforms and updating legislation. Therefore, for successful integration into the European Union Ukraine should use European experience and implement best practices in its management system, which requires proper scientific research.
Recent research and publication analysis. The problem of applying the principles of good governance has been studied by many scientists. First of all, it should be noted that these principles have not yet been officially enshrined in Ukrainian legislation. Therefore, our scientific research will be based on the work of modern scientists.
Paper objective. The purpose of this article is an integrated and comprehensive study of the legal foundations of the principle of good governance, the question of interpretation by judicial authorities, the interpretation of the definition of the principle by international bodies and EU bodies.
Paper main body. The concept of “good governance” is multifaceted, because it regulates and standardizes the components that are necessary for the high-quality functioning of the public authority system. The principles of “good governance” defined in 1997 in the UN program “Governance and Sustainable Human Development” are the principles of legitimacy, direction, productivity, accountability, and justice. In 2008 the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe laid out “12 principles of good governance”.
These principles should become guidelines for the public authority system, including inspections with comprehensive and complete research of data, proper performance of official duties by officials, the possibility for citizens to effectively challenge the decisions of the tax authority, etc. The principle of good governance also applies to tax disputes, since the taxpayer, not having his own power functions, has a limited ability to control its counterparty.
In order to settle these issues, it is necessary to start with high-quality legal regulation. All branches of government should be “Guardians of change”. However, civil society, in turn, should also show readiness for such changes and contribute to them.
Conclusion of the research. The implementation of “good governance” model is aimed at the comprehensive reform of the entire sphere of public administration in the direction of democratization and the introduction of international standards of management practice. This includes ensuring transparency, accountability and efficiency in the activities of state bodies. This model should be comprehensive, multi-level and provide feedback mechanisms between the government, society and the individual. Feedback mechanisms, such as public hearings, advisory council’s regular population surveys, will allow the authorities to receive timely information about the real needs and problems of citizens, which will contribute to making more informed and effective decisions.
The implementation of this model also requires the development and implementation of new approaches to the training of civil servants, with an emphasis on increasing their competence, ethics and responsibility.
Short аbstract for an article
Abstract. The actual problem of modernization of the Ukrainian management system in the context of implementing the principles of good governance is considered in the article. The author draws attention to the fact that the introduction of modern methods and approaches to management is a necessary step to ensure the effective work of state structures, namely tax authorities. It is noted that in the context of European integration processes and the need to adapt to international standards it is important for Ukraine to review its approaches to management at all levels, from national to local. It involves not only
introducing new technologies, but also reforming administrative procedures and improving the skills of civil servants.

Keywords

 good governance, administrative reform, European integration, governance, management principles, tax disputes, public administration, local government,
modernization, international standards.

Reviewer

External reviewer

Article in PDF

 87-103

Bibliography

 1. Pavlunenko, K. (2020). Znachennia i rol akta podatkovoi perevirky ta yoho vplyv na podatkovi pravovidnosyny [The meaning and role of the tax audit act and its impact on tax legal relations]. Pravo Ukrainy – Law of Ukraine, 4, 115–126 [in Ukrainian].
2. Pavlunenko, K. (2022). Pravova pryroda podatkovoi informatsii ta yii otsinka u podatkovykh sporakh [Legal nature of tax information and its assessment in tax disputes]. The Supreme Court of Ukraine. https://supreme.court.gov.ua/userfiles/media/new_folder_for_uploads/supreme/2022_prezent/2022_07_04_Pavlynenko.pdf [in Ukrainian].
3. Dniprov, O. (2021). Pryntsypy nalezhnoho uriaduvannia v suchasnii systemi administratyvnoho prava Ukrainy [Principles of proper governance in the modern system of administrative law of Ukraine]. Pidpryiemnytstvo, hospodarstvo i pravo – Entrepreneurship, economy and law, 1, 114–118. http://pgp-journal.kiev.ua/archive/2021/1/20.pdf [in Ukrainian].
4. Montana State University. (n.d.). Principles of good governance. https://www.montana.edu/extension/localgov/resourcesandhandouts/referencedocuments/Principles%20of%20Good%20Governance.pdf
5. Council of Europe. (n.d.). 12 Principles of Good Governance. https://www.coe.int/en/web/centre-of-expertise-for-multilevel-governance/12‑principles
6. Rishennia Yevropeiskoho Sudu z prav liudyny «Asimionese proty Respubliky Moldova» vid 07.01.2020. (2020). [Decision of the European Court of Human Rights «Asimionese v. Republic of Moldova» dated January 07, 2020]. ECHR: Ukrainian Aspect. https://www.echr.com.ua/translation/sprava-asimionese-proti-respublikimoldova [in Ukrainian].
7. Rishennia Yevropeiskoho Sudu z prav liudyny «Moskal proty Polshchi» vid 15.09.2009 (10373/05). (2009). [Decision of the European Court of Human Rights «Moskal v. Poland» dated September 15, 2009]. https://ips.ligazakon.net/document/ES001177?hide=true
8. Rishennia Yevropeiskoho Sudu z prav liudyny “Gashi proty Khorvatii” vid 13.12.2007 (32457/05). (2007). [Decision of the European Court of Human Rights “Gashi v. Croatia” dated December 13, 2007]. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-84005%22]}
9. Rishennia Yevropeiskoho Sudu z prav liudyny “Hrafov proty Ukrainy” vid 15.09.2022 (№ 4809/10). (2022). [Decision of the European Court of Human Rights “Grafov v. Ukraine” dated September 15, 2022]. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_e18#Text [in Ukrainian]
10. Rishennia Yevropeiskoho Sudu z prav liudyny “Chakarevych proty Khorvatii” vid 26.04.2018 (48921/13). (2018). [Decision of the European Court of Human Rights “Cakarević v. Croatia” dated April 26, 2018 (application No. 48921/13)]. https://court.gov.ua/userfiles/media/new_folder_for_uploads/supreme/rizne/Guide_Articte%201_ECHR_Ukrainian.pdf [in Ukrainian].
11. Rishennia Yevropeiskoho Sudu z prav liudyny “Intersplav proty Ukrainy” vid 09.01.2007 (803/02). (2007). [Decision of the European Court of Human Rights “Intersplav v. Ukraine” dated January 9, 2007 (Application No. 803/02)]. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_194#Text [in Ukrainian].
12. Rishennia Yevropeiskoho Sudu z prav liudyny “Bulves” AD proty Bolharii” vid 22.01.2009 (3991/03). (2009). [Decision of the European Court of Human Rights “Bulves” AD v. Bulgaria” dated January 22, 2009 (Application No. 3991/03)]. https://ips.ligazakon.net/document/SOO00553 [in Ukrainian].
13. Rishennia Yevropeiskoho Sudu z prav liudyny “Biznes Suport Tsentr proty Bolharii” vid 18.03.2010 (6689/03). (2010). [Decision of the European Court of Human Rights “Business Support Center v. Bulgaria” dated March 18, 2010 (application No. 6689/03)]. https://shieldlaw.com.ua/tag/biznes-suport-tsentr-proty-bolgariyi/ [in Ukrainian].
14. Rishennia Yevropeiskoho Sudu z prav liudyny “Serkov proty Ukrainy” vid 07.07.2011 (39766/05). (2011). [Decision of the European Court of Human Rights “Serkov v. Ukraine” dated July 07, 2011 (application No. 39766/05)]. https://court.gov.ua/userfiles/file/court_gov_ua_sud5010/Konvenciya_z_prav/st_%201%20protokol/SERKOV.pdf [in Ukrainian].
15. Rishennia Yevropeiskoho Sudu z prav liudyny “Rysovskyi proty Ukrainy” vid 20.10.2011 (29979/04). (2011). [Decision of the European Court of Human Rights “Rysovsky v. Ukraine” dated October 20, 2011 (application No. 29979/04)]. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_854 [in Ukrainian].
16. Rishennia Yevropeiskoho Sudu z prav liudyny “Arzomazova proty Respubliky Moldova” vid 04.08.2020 (38639/14). (2020). [Decision of the European Court of Human Rights “Arzomazova v. Republic of Moldova” dated August 4, 2020 (application No. 38639/14)]. https://supreme.court.gov.ua/userfiles/media/new_folder_for_uploads/supreme/Oglyad_ESPL_08_09_2020.pdf [in Ukrainian].
17. Zadorozhnyi, O. (2017, July 14). Vzaiemovidnosyny z fiktyvnym kontrahentom: praktychni aspekty vidstoiuvannia prav platnykiv podatkiv cherez pryzmu zastosuvannia praktyky YeSPL [Relations with a fictitious counterparty: practical aspects of defending the rights of taxpayers through the prism of applying the practice of the ECtHR]. Natsionalna asotsiatsiia advokativ Ukrainy – National Association of Lawyers of Ukraine. https://unba.org.ua/publications/print/2533‑vzaemovidnosini-z-fiktivnimkontragentom-praktichni-aspekti-vidstoyuvannya-prav-platnikiv-podatkiv-cherezprizmu-zastosuvannya-praktiki-espl.html [in Ukrainian].
18. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 28.06.2018 u spravi № 294/220/14‑ts. (2018). [Resolution of the Supreme Court dated June 28, 2018 in case No. 294/220/14‑ts]. https://zakononline.com.ua/court-decisions/show/75099222 [in Ukrainian].
19. Postanova Velykoi Palaty Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 02.07.2019 u spravi № 910/23000/17. (2019). [Resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court dated July 2, 2019 in case No. 910/23000/17]. https://zakononline.com.ua/court-decisions/show/82998256 [in Ukrainian].
20. Rishennia Volynskoho okruzhnoho administratyvnoho sudu vid 01.12.2023 № 140/23304/23. (2023). [Decision of the Volyn District Administrative Court dated December 1, 2023 No. 140/23304/23]. https://youcontrol.com.ua/catalog/courtdocument/115377890 [in Ukrainian].
21. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 10.06.2021 u spravi № 822/1886/18. (2021). [Resolution of the Supreme Court dated June 10, 2021 in case No. 822/1886/18]. https://protocol.ua/ua/postanova_kas_vp_vid_10_06_2021_roku_u_spravi_822_1886_18 [in Ukrainian].
22. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 27.07.2022 u spravi № 520/15348/2020. (2022). [Resolution of the Supreme Court of July 27, 2022 in case No. 520/15348/2020]. http://iplex.com.ua/doc.php?regnum=105444235&red=1000034942058b6871b2220904b748cfdd375f&d=5 [in Ukrainian].

Code DOI

 https://doi.org/10.31359/2411-5584-2024-58-3-87

This post is also available in: Ukrainian

05.09.2024